Joep Vesseur wrote:
> On 06/10/08 21:46, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>
>> Joseph Kowalski wrote:
>>
>>> We understand that we have little control about the content of the
>>> actual binaries. The only thing we can control is the documentation
>>> (more exactly, supplement the documentation). We should *never* make
>>> subjective statements in the documentation, but factual "Danger Will
>>> Robertson" NOTES seem quite appropriate.
>>>
>> We already add an Attributes table to many (most?) upstream man pages,
>> so "Does Solaris Auditing?" could be just another line we start adding
>> to the table. (Is there something more useful to administrators than
>> a boolean there? Like an audit record type which may be "none"?)
>>
>>
>
> We'll take the suggestion of adding some words to the manpage with us
> in this phase.
>
> I like the suggestion of adding to the table, but it wouldn't make sense to do
> this for just this command. I'll ping the audit and doc folks to see if we can
> put a stick in the sand here, or whether we'll just go verbal and explain it
> in a NOTES section.
>
To the ARC at large: Does creation of new "Attribute" warrant a case on
its own? (Could be an easy fast track, if not controversial.)
-- Garrett
> Joep
>
